Bowery Goes Stark!

http://reasonradionetwork.com/category/programs/the-stark-truth
http://reasonradionetwork.com/downloads/tst/VoR-The_Stark_Truth-20120201.mp3

The Stark Truth: Interview with James Bowery, Part 1

Robert [Stark] interviews James Bowery. Topics include:
  Bowery details pioneering background in IT and its funding programs - thwarted by Jewish interests causing him to re-think his concerns;

  Horizontal transmission – border crossing - key to evolution of Jewish virulence

  Both freely chosen ecologies of the new world and deeply evolved European ecologies made ready by county sized political units; 

  Civilization removed characteristic European male way of challenging interlopers to a duel, placing immigration control in hands of state, creates drone males;

  Internet most promising aspect of situation now – bypasses central controls, facilitates voluntary associations, independence from global forces;

  Primary barriers for Whites: ‘shells’ of nations, used by global interests, turning security apparatus against people; and residual “worker bee” mentality.

Posted by Søren Renner on Monday, February 6, 2012 at 10:29 AM in
Comments (11) | Tell-a-Friend

The communitarian critique of liberalism left and right

by Graham Lister

For the philosophical communitarian, the Sartrean cogito, spontaneously reinventing itself ex nihilo, permanently free to choose and revise its definition of the good, is a fiction that pervades all modern liberalism. From Hobbes, Locke and Kant, through to Mill and Rawls, the rootless, solitary and “unencumbered self”, as Michael Sandel describes it, prior to and independent of its ends and rationally deliberating on the value of its voluntary attachments, is adopted as the starting point of social analysis.

This conception of the subject, it is argued, precludes from the start the possibility of genuinely communal forms of association, of “constitutive” communities “bound by moral ties antecedent to choice”. This is why communitarians stress the cultural constitution of the subject, the way the individual forms his or her identity, sense of self, and intuitive system of values by inheriting and passing on an unchosen legacy of collective orientations, shared meanings and standards, networks of kinship and pre-contractual forms of solidarity which are a prerequisite for, rather than the outcome of, the subject’s capacity for moral commitment.

Continued...

Posted by Guest Blogger on Sunday, February 5, 2012 at 06:51 AM in Political Philosophy
Comments (45) | Tell-a-Friend

Anti-white ideology is like anti-biotic overuse

White nationalists are like MRSA; a super-strain.  We become viral meme creators, and we become viral ourselves, in resisting anti-white anti-biotics.

Continued...

Posted by Kievsky on Saturday, February 4, 2012 at 08:39 AM in
Comments (14) | Tell-a-Friend

2 2 2012

Posted by Søren Renner on Thursday, February 2, 2012 at 07:43 PM in
Comments (56) | Tell-a-Friend

Will someone arrest, and prosecute, this fine lady?

Apropos of the arrest and prosecution of Emma West (#1, #2, #3) and Brendon O’Connell (3 years imprisonment), will someone mete out “justice” in this case?

Interesting tidbits:
@ 0:03 “you’re like a disease” [berating the bus driver].
@ 0:13 To the driver: “What do you want GOY [i.e. non-jew]? What’dya want GOY?” … a passenger says “he’s the driver” … she says “He’s a GOY!”
@ 0:39 To a passenger: “your grin is gonna turn to blood. May your grin turn to blood [repeats this several times]”
@ 1:01 – 1:14 She: “I’m calling the Mashiach [Hebrew Messiah] to kill you. Serve the Jews or die. I’m part of the Rebbe’s campaign and I don’t ever want the Messiah coming for you ever. I want you to be completely abandoned and I want you to turn into a slave.”
@ 1:16 onward she says, “I’m a Jewess, every mikvah I kill you retarded Nazis” (followed by some chant or curse in Hebrew) “every mikvah I do kills you Nazis… Every Nazi I kill is all for the Jewish people.”
@ 1:44 she says to a female passenger (out of view), “now shut your nasty mouth or suck a cock. How much cock have you sucked you gnarly girl? You suck that cock? Put it in your throat girl you gotta get that cum everywhere, you little ho, you little Nazi girl, you’re naughty, you’re naughty..”

Posted by R-news on Wednesday, February 1, 2012 at 03:53 PM in Media,  Oh Tempora, Oh Mores,  World Affairs
Comments (5) | Tell-a-Friend

Black March 2012

Black March 2012 is a campaign to avoid purchasing movies, music, books and video games during March 2012. It’s in responsive to continual attempts by malicious individuals to control the dissemination of information under the guise of anti-piracy measures (SOPA, PIPA, ACTA, Trans-Pacific Partnership, etc.) or child protection (PCIPA). Spread the word. And don’t defeat the measure by buying excessively in February to carry yourself through March. Seek alternatives to occupy your time with: a new exercise program, more outdoor time with your children, browsing the internet, learning a musical instrument, learning a new language, etc.

Posted by R-news on Wednesday, February 1, 2012 at 03:08 PM in Activism,  Business & Industry,  World Affairs
Comments (1) | Tell-a-Friend

Pre-revolutionary intellectualism, and the eternal beginning of nationalism

It’s really one question that hangs over political nationalism, though it has many forms.  How do we make politics amid all this hostility?  How do we get this movement moving?  How do we make our people wake up?  How do we get them to turn away from near concerns and act at last in their own ethnic interest?  Is it better to be accommodationist, civicist, expedient and dishonest?  Or principled?  Isn’t “principle” the problem?

And so forth.

For weeks the BNPIdeas website, which is centred on Andrew Brons, has been filled with inventive ways to ask this question.  Inevitable I suppose, given last October’s failure to launch a new party and the non-appearance of the “parallel party structure” that was promised in its stead.  It is apparent now that action of any profitable kind is beyond the power of nationalism in Britain.  Fear of moving forward, disdain at staying put, the impossibility of going back, spill out all over the page, and over it all hangs the big red sign declaring triumphantly, “You lost!”

Which is all too possible as things stand.  No surprise then, to see yet another agonised article, this time penned by a William Shakespeare (of no evident poetic leaning), deploring the division in nationalist ranks, and proposing “the way forward” thus:

I also appeal TO YOU – YOU who are reading this article – because, like any proposal, it requires a display of support and the posting here of as many messages of general support and agreement as possible.

The plan I put to you is this. In order to advance the prospect of Nationalist Unity, without which nothing on a national political front can ever be accomplished, I propose that a simple petition, or plebiscite to use an old term, of ALL Nationalists and supporters of Nationalism is undertaken.

Every individual would submit their name and some address detail to distinguish them (if not a home address, an email perhaps) and – this is the really important bit – each person would include a brief summary of what THEY consider to be the most vital pieces of policy and constitutional requirements that a single, united, nationwide major Nationalist Party ought to have.

That is the ineluctable product of an absence of leadership and clear principle.  But, then, nationalism in Britain has ever been a cut flower ideologically, and no leader could compensate for that, as I tried to explain in a comment to the bard’s article:

Continued...

Posted by Guessedworker on Tuesday, January 31, 2012 at 08:24 PM in British Politics
Comments (33) | Tell-a-Friend

Sound principles of money, by Arthur Kitson

Arthur Kitson published a book, A scientific Solution of the Money Question, in 1895. It’s accessible for free. This is a very interesting book because he’s a strong proponent of the free market, even using the analogy of natural selection in arriving at the form money should take to maximize the welfare of as many people as possible, and comes down hard on any sort of monopoly regarding the creation of money, arguing against both banker and government control of money. With this kind of attitude, the capitalists, or socialists, or free market proponents can’t dismiss his arguments right off the bat.

He has a very nuanced discussion on wealth, value, standard of value, price, purchasing power, the wisdom of keeping money scarce, etc. This book needs to be summarized, but for now, the most interesting parts will do.

The price of something for sale is dependent on supply and demand for this thing. It’s also dependent on the supply and demand for money. So there’s plenty of room for bankers to make a profit. Now let’s add a third variable, which is to base money on a commodity. Now, the commodity on which money is based can be hoarded, exported, imported, cornered or thrown upon the market, and thus the purchasing power of money affected. Now you know why some people insist that money should be based on a commodity. The third variable plays into the hands of the bankers. Obviously, the bankers have no interest in proposing a commodity to base money on that’s plentiful. They propose a commodity that’s scarce, such as gold, because a scarce commodity is easier to manipulate.

Kitson cites numerous examples of a gold standard being forced upon people, and shows that a free market would never accept money based on gold. Kitson’s thesis is a devastating critique of basing money on a commodity. Kitson followed with an addendum or reply to critics in 1917, titled A fraudulent standard : an exposure of the fraudulent character of our monetary standard, with suggestions for the establishment of an invariable unit of value.

So money established by law, a concept going back as far as Aristotle, is sound as fiat money, i.e., money not backed by a commodity. But who should issue it? Kitson comes down hard on bankers issuing money, as well as a government monopoly on the issuance of money, citing instances of government corruption. Keep in mind that the book was published in 1895. From 1866 to 1886, the volume of money in America had been reduced by almost 80%, causing a depression. Superficially, the government did it by removing greenbacks (debt-free government-issued money) and silver from circulation. Silver was also removed from circulation in many European countries around this time. The actual reason was the bankers had used their control over the governments to bring this about because they wanted to force a gold standard. The American dollar went on a gold standard in 1900.

So who should issue money? According to Kitson, money should be issued by the people! He proposes a mutual banking system. Mutual banks are owned by communities. They create money for loans, out of thin air, against any commodity or IOU (someone promising to pay back the loan). There’s a service fee but no interest. At any given time therefore, the amount needed for repayment of loans doesn’t exceed the amount created as loans, and no one’s forced to default. Money created in this manner goes through an accounting cycle, the same as under commercial banking today: it’s created when a loan is made and destroyed when the loan is paid. The money for the service fee is created out of thin air when a loan is made and used by the mutual bank for its operations.

There are four important differences between Kitson’s proposal and how commercial banks currently operate:

1. Commercial banks charge interest, which isn’t issued. Just to maintain the volume of money under commercial banking, total loan activity must exceed total repayment activity of the principle sum, which is the reason for spiraling debt and inflation. A $100 loan at 10% interest needs to be paid in the amount of $110 in one year, and this $110 can only come from money that has been issued as debt [doesn’t matter that one has earned it]. The new $110 loan at 10% interest amounts to a payback amount of $121 in one year, which, again, can only come from money issued as debt. And so on.
2. Commercial banks operate under the oversight of a private central bank. This facilitates coordinated reduction in the amount of loans granted or coordinated increases in interest rates, thereby diminishing the volume of money in society, forcing many to default. This, in a nutshell, is an economic bust. The bankers now foreclose and obtain assets for pennies on the dollar. But a community that runs its own mutual bank has no reason to do this to itself nor any reason to coordinate with other communities’ mutual banks and trouble other communities along with itself in this manner.
3. Commercial banks issue loans against very specific items as collateral, whereas mutual banks will issue loans against any commodity with the understanding that when the commodity ceases to exist in functional form, the money created and issued against it must also be destroyed.
4. Commercial banks claim ownership of the money they create as debt. When people default, commercial banks foreclose. Mutual banks won’t foreclose, as a community wouldn’t want to see its members homeless, but work out an arrangement with the person unable to pay the debts to do community service without pay or perhaps allow another member of the community as a roommate who pays rent to the mutual bank.

Under Kitson’s proposal, there’s no shortage of money and no inflation. Abuse is prevented via internal policing, rotation of mutual bank employees, non-hereditary appointment of mutual bank employees, and random external audits by a central authority that can only intervene in the case of fraud.

How will a government obtain the money for its needs? Taxes.

Whereas the government can create its own money, if the government is dependent on the people to pay for its expenses and the people control the money supply, the people decide the nature of the government.

In the special case of advanced technology replacing a lot of human labor with machines, which creates a scenario where specialized factories can produce goods at great initial cost but the displaced don’t have the income to buy these goods, whereas the government may create money out of thin air to extend as social credit to the displaced, since it’s desirable that the government obtain money from the people, the central government should be taking money from mutual banks to extend to people as social credit, in which case the mutual banks make an exception by creating the money out of thin air but not as a loan.

The mutual banking system proposed by Arthur Kitson is clearly superior to the solution that I’ve been promoting for a couple of months, which is that money should be created in a debt-free manner and issued by a government, in which case money that’s created truly circulates as opposed to going through an accounting cycle whereby it’s created and destroyed. The accounting cycle under the charge of mutual banks is easily able to achieve a level of fine tuning to needs that circulating debt-free money created by a government can’t. Technically, mutual banks could be extensions of the central government’s Treasury, in which case the government will be the sole authority creating money, and this wouldn’t require a Constitutional Amendment in nations such as the U.S., where the Constitution only grants Congress the power to create money, but the argument that placing control of money in the hands of a society that uses it is better than a few hands controlling money holds, even if the few hands compirse of an elected and accountable government, and therefore mutual banks had better be community owned.

Now, there’s no way to go from the present system—where commercial banks create nearly all money as debt and people are indebeted to private bankers to the tune of tens of trillions of dollars—to a mutual banking system. This reminds one of the 25-point program of the NSDAP. At the outset, they emphasized the necessity for a strong central government to undo the damage caused by the bankers, noting that the 25 points of the program were temporary. At present there’s a need for a central government to take full charge of the creation and issuance of money, creating debt-free money to retire the national debt and prohibiting private banks from creating money in any way. After a few years, one could transition to mutual banking for the masses and the government only creating money for its own needs. This can transition to a government solely relying on taxes for its expenses and obtaining money from mutual banks for social credit money. But activists don’t have to wait for government control of money before attempting to implement mutual banks. The problem needs to be attacked from many fronts, and one can work on mutual banks right now [to be discussed].

So I need to overhaul the money FAQ and note that the solution offered there as of the date of this posting should be regarded as an intermediate solution, not the final solution.

Kitson wasn’t the first to propose mutual banks. Others have proposed a similar system. The Local Exchange Trading System (LETS) works on a similar principle. John Turmel has shown the mathematical soundness of LETS or Kitson’s proposal. I believe the same idea is described in Paul Grignon’s Money as Debt volume 3 video. Islamic banking—not to be confused with banks operating under the auspices of international bankers in the typical Middle Eastern or predominantly Muslim nation—incorporates one of the proposed principles, too, such as not charging interest.

Posted by R-news on Tuesday, January 31, 2012 at 03:59 PM in Business & Industry,  Economics & Finance
Comments (7) | Tell-a-Friend

Large-scale protests in Poland over ACTA

Tens of thousands of people in Poland have been taking to the streets, in freezing weather, to protest the government being open to the enforcement of ACTA (ACTA = Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement), which is administered by an international body outside local jurisdiction. It has been noted that the real reason for ACTA (also the Trans-Pacific Partnership; SOPA and PIPA) is an attempt to control the dissemination of information, not the superficial issue of violation of copyright.

Posted by R-news on Monday, January 30, 2012 at 04:54 PM in Business & Industry,  European culture,  European Union,  Global Elitism,  World Affairs
Comments (0) | Tell-a-Friend

Protests against austerity measures paralyze Belgium

It was recently noted that Europeans will be increasingly experiencing what the Third World has to experience when bankers start enforcing austerity measures because Europeans governments borrow money from bankers, at interest, money that the bankers create out of thin air. Here are recent mass protests against austerity measures (more taxes, less benefits, increase in retirement age, etc.) in Belgium that shut down large parts of her.

Posted by R-news on Monday, January 30, 2012 at 04:28 PM in Business & Industry,  Economics & Finance,  European Union,  World Affairs
Comments (0) | Tell-a-Friend

With liberals, the LOLs just write themselves

The LOLs just write themselves with this picture.  Trolling liberals—like hunting shmoos but more satisfying.

Continued...

Posted by Kievsky on Monday, January 30, 2012 at 01:21 PM in
Comments (4) | Tell-a-Friend

The Females of the Species

Murder in Families

By John M. Dawson and Patrick A. Langan, Ph.D.
BJS Statisticians

A survey of murder cases disposed in 1988 in the courts of large urban counties indicated that 16% of murder victims were members of the defendant’s family. The remainder were murdered by friends or acquaintances (64%) or by strangers (20%).

A third of family murders involved a female as the killer. In sibling murders, females were 15% of killers, and in murders of parents, 18%. But in spouse murders, women represented 41% of killers. In murders of their offspring, women predominated, accounting for 55% of killers.

When a mother killed her own child, the offspring she killed was more likely to be a son than a daughter: 64% sons versus 36% daughters. But when a father killed his own child, the offspring he killed was about as likely to be a daughter as a son: 52% daughters versus 48% sons.

• When a son killed a parent, his victim was about as likely to be the mother as the father: 47% mothers versus 53% fathers. But when a daughter killed a parent, her victim was more likely to be the father than the mother: 81% fathers versus 19% mothers.

Posted by Robert Reis on Sunday, January 29, 2012 at 03:37 PM in Social Sciences
Comments (0) | Tell-a-Friend

Re: The New American Divide, by Charles Murray

[submission by Genotype]

Murray’s thesis is higher cognitive abilities lead to greater economic productivity and thus higher salaries. This is merely an update to Ayn Rand‘s update to Horatio Alger’s “rags to riches” legends.

Murray and his jewish employers at AEI have two transparent goals:

1.Describe what anyone with an IQ > 90 can see has happened and continues to happen economically.

2.Gain control of the discourse by eliminating all references to “The Other” from the universe of permitted explanations for #1.

Re: What the Top 1% of Earners Majored In

The undergrad degree data don’t support Murray’s proposed explanation for the Great Divide. Undergrad science and engineering majors that might lead to advanced science degrees are grossly underrepresented in the 1% group. They are so underrepresented that this data alone falsifies Murray’s primary explanation.

“Biology” obviously serves as a proxy for “pre-med.” Humanities majors of the kind that comprise “pre-law” curriculums are heavily over-represented. History, “economics,” and political science are obvious pre-law programs. What to make of zoology and physiology, except failure to make the cut for “pre-med”? Note that mathematics and physics are on the bottom.  Computer science and mechanical/electrical/civil engineering didn’t make the list.

Posted by R-news on Saturday, January 28, 2012 at 06:59 PM in Blogs & Blogging,  Economics & Finance,  Education,  Global Elitism,  Political analysis,  Social Sciences,  That Question Again
Comments (22) | Tell-a-Friend

The Money Problem When Machines and Robots Increasingly Replace Human Workers

A recent discussion of problems with Apple using humans as machines to build iPhones, iPods and iPads prompted two arguments. One concerning mounting a challenge to globalization has been partially discussed. This post addresses the other issue, of 3D printing solving the problem of exploiting humans in this case by replacing human labor .

3D printing is still expensive for the masses (a few thousand dollars for a unit; example: the Fab-at-home projects), and whereas these can take care of building enclosures for smart phones or hand-held computers, make cables and even print basic circuits, it’s a totally different ball game to make microcontrollers, NAND memory chips, microprocessors, or VLSI units in general (VLSI = Very-large-scale integration [of transistors, which are electronic switches]). Bankers will prefer to establish fabrication units for VLSI products where labor costs are minimal and the government has been bribed or corrupted.

Apple can easily automate robots to make iPhones, iPads and iPods, but has decided to use humans as machines for reasons already discussed. This can be considered in a more general context.

With advances in machinery and automation, human workers are easily replaced with much more efficient worker units. The problem with computerized machines or robots replacing humans is that the initial cost of manufacturing increases sharply and it must be recouped in the prices of the manufactured products, but the increasing amount of people losing their jobs to machines also have less disposable income to buy these products. At some point, even cheaper-than-present 3D printers will be too expensive for people increasingly displaced by machines. How does one address this problem?

Clifford Hugh Douglas and other proponents had an elegant solution: social credit. It was never implemented because it requires debt-free creation of money by a government. The proposal is that if people through no fault of their own (e.g., not lazy or unwilling to work) are only able to pay, say, 25% of the cost of a product because they’ve been replaced by machines, the government should provide the remainder to them so that they can obtain the product.

The first objection was that this would cause inflation, whereas the social credit proponents showed that this is a bogus objection because demand and supply are being matched by money that simply needs to be created out of thin air by the government [prohibit private bankers from creating money and there wouldn’t be inflation].

A second objection would be abuse. How does one take care of the lazy? It’s a simple matter, easily done by computers nowadays, to take into account job availability, work history, prior income, disability status, etc., and determine if an applicant deserves social credit.

What if a company decided to establish a factory to produce smart phones with a hexa-core ARM processor having six times the cache, gold plating and diamonds? Should a government take it upon itself to provide its citizens with such a smart phone? No, the task of the government is to assist with maintaining a minimum acceptable quality of life for the citizens. A single-core ARM processor with a sixth of the cache of the hypothetical unit and no gold or diamonds does a fine job at computing and communications at present, and suffices for government assistance.

What if manufacturing can potentially ramp up production to satisfy just about as much demand as can arise, but the products are negative for the environment beyond a certain volume? In this case, the government can limit social credit to a certain number of individuals. If 3 million qualify and only a million should be supported, the million are chosen from the qualified applicants at random.

This can be extrapolated to population size. Maintaining a higher quality of life for a larger population depletes a lot of natural resources. The government can hence tie social credit to not exceeding a maximum family size:

Do you have at least two biological children and desire social credit? Well, you meet other requirements, but need to subject yourself to vasectomy or tubal ligation or else you’re not getting any social credit for big items.

Do you have one or no children and desire social credit? Apparently, based on your records, you qualify for social credit but we’ll just help you with rent and won’t put in the remainder to buy you a house unless you’re so old that it’s unlikely that you’ll be having [more] children or have had yourself vasectomized or your tubes ligated.

I think the reader should get the idea.

Posted by R-news on Saturday, January 28, 2012 at 06:45 PM in Business & Industry,  Economics & Finance
Comments (24) | Tell-a-Friend

Alternatives to Globalization “delivering the goods”

A recent discussion of problems with Apple using humans as machines to build iPhones, iPods and iPads prompted the argument that “A major problem in mounting a challenge to globalization is that it delivers the goods” and that it’s unlikely that people will give up their iPhones. The situation isn’t bleak. People can adopt a few strategies, as individuals, to lessen the problem.

The first is to buy smart phones, music players and hand-held computers from smaller manufacturers. Let’s say there are 10 companies, all using Chinese human labor to make such products. How does it benefit one to go with a smaller manufacturer?

This is how. Bankers love large companies making a lot of profit as advertising can make their products highly desirable, and the profits entice investors to buy the large company’s shares. Then it’s a matter of bringing down the company and raking in the loot... naive investors lose, bankers win. Now, if the consumer were to prevent any company from getting large by buying products from smaller manufacturers, bankers have less to gain by bringing down a small company here and there, and can only benefit by bringing down an entire industry or the stock market in general, which they can’t do very frequently or else investors will lose confidence in the stock market.

Notice that buying from smaller manufacturers may also cost less as there’s no premium paid for a top-notch brand name. Also note that the extras that come with some top-notch products aren’t worth the price. Would you rather pay a $200 premium for a smart phone with 1080p video playback capability when the screen size makes this functionality useless and the functionality is useful only if you connect it to a 1920 X 1080 monitor, in which case you might as well use any computer built in recent years to send 1080p video to the monitor, or upgrade the graphics card of an older computer for a lot less, or buy, for less, a blu-ray player capable of playing mkv, mov, divx, mp4 and other formats from a plugged-in USB drive?

The second strategy is do-it-yourself projects. The ARM-based computer board at the hear of smart phones and hand-held computers can be purchased separately. The open-hardware beagleboard and beaglebone, for instance, sell for $150 and $89, respectively, and offer 720p video playback and muscle for ordinary computing tasks equivalent to the first generation of iPad. Other alternatives, some even cheaper, comprise of the leopardboard, craneboard, pandora, etc.

Now, it may be a hassle for some to separately buy a capacitive touch screen, cables, etc., and find a suitable enclosure for the computer board, but there are some people who’ve already done the job, like the Grégoire Gentil group at always innovating, who offer a ready-made smart book based on open-hardware, and they even offer, for free, a multi-boot system allowing one to switch between four open-source operating systems, depending on whether one wishes to use the unit as a smart phone or as a general purpose computer.

To use the unit as a phone, you can use voice-over-IP (VOIP) technologies such as skype (avoid google talk). To get cell phone functionality, you’re better off obtaining a barebones cellphone, which service providers will usually throw-in for free, using things along the lines of Grégoire Gentil’s products for your other smart phone and hand-held computer needs. Or maybe solutions comprising of a dongle that will let you use your unit with cell phone networks already exist.

Aside from these individual steps, there’s always organizing in specific ways to target the bankers.

Posted by R-news on Saturday, January 28, 2012 at 03:29 PM in Activism,  Business & Industry,  Economics & Finance,  Globalisation
Comments (0) | Tell-a-Friend

Bankers Making Apple Run Sweatshops in China

The sweatshops Apple runs in China have recently come up in the news. Instead of using machines to assemble iPhones, iPods and iPads, Apple is using humans as machines. A factory in Shenzhen employs 430,000 people who work in halls with up to 20,000 to 30,000 people each. Workers aren’t allowed to talk to each other, there are no recreational breaks and people work under video surveillance. Some of the workers are children in their early teens, who are kept away from sight when inspectors arrive. Whereas the official work day is 8 hours, the standard shift is 12 hours, which commonly extends to 14-16 hours, at 70 cents per hour.

People asking for overtime are shrugged off and blacklisted; if they resign in protest, they’d have a difficult time seeking another job. Seeking to unionize is an imprisonable offense.

Occupational hazards include exposure to neurotoxic agents used to polish glass, such as hexane, whereas safer cleansers aren’t used because they take longer to evaporate. Monotonous, repetitive work leads to carpal tunnel syndrome and other disabilities. Those with disabling injuries are out of luck.

Many of these human-bots haven’t even seen in person, let alone held, a complete, functional iPad or another Apple product in their hand to evaluate what it is that they’re building. And when they sleep, they do so in cubicles packed with bunk beds, like prisoners in a crowded facility.

And to think that some people would describe this despicable situation as a wealth transfer from the the West to the East in terms of manufacturing and other jobs sent abroad! Superficially, the earnings of these workers have easily quadrupled compared to their working in rice farms earlier, but look at their living conditions, and watch as the purchasing power of money keeps going down because the government borrows from bankers, at interest, money the bankers create out of thin air.

If the Chinese masses work in farms, produce enough food for themselves, produce surplus food to barter against petroleum, medicine, etc., and the government creates it own money without debt, the Chinese can live independently and can sustain themselves, whereas now their economy’s in the hands of the international bankers while many of their people work like machines, sustaining mechanical injuries and damage from exposure to toxic chemicals.

The West doesn’t benefit either. Many Western consumers are precluded from buying bling bling such as iPads because of a lack of disposable income, and a good proportion of those who buy such bling bling do so by borrowing money, for which they’ll pay dearly in terms of interest.

Apple could technically improve worker conditions by cutting its profit margins, but is unable to do so because it’s a publicly traded corporation, and financial corporations have enough of a stake in it to dictate policies, the bottom line being increasing profit to attract investors. When the time’s ripe, these financial corporations will bring down the stock market, thus effecting a wealth transfer from the masses of naive investors to the bankers behind the financial corporations.

Many of the financial corporations having a stake in major non-financial corporations in major economies such as America’s are located offshore as well as many of the bankers. This diminishes the odds of a successful political revolt against the bankers. And we can see that the outsourcing of manufacturing and numerous other jobs from the major Western economies is further insurance against the same as weakened Western masses are less capable of revolt.

Posted by R-news on Friday, January 27, 2012 at 03:39 PM in Business & Industry,  Economics & Finance,  Globalisation,  World Affairs
Comments (6) | Tell-a-Friend

A potential one-man mental hospital for Anders Behring Breivik!

If one considers the logistics of the Norwegian massacre on July 22, 2011, the anniversary of the King David Hotel bombing by Jews, there’s no way one man did it, and the totality of the evidence points to Jews. The alleged perpetrator, Anders Behring Breivik, was later declared insane and unfit for trial, the rationale given for his insanity being completely bogus. Anders Behring Breivik is reportedly kept in isolation. Since he needs to be confined to a mental hospital, now they’re saying that there’s no psychiatric facility in Norway secure enough to prevent him from escaping, and hence they may build a one-man hospital to confine Breivik!

At this point on has to wonder whether Anders Behring Breivik is an actual person. I don’t think he is. There’s the bogus facebook page, the digitally edited photographs of this alleged person, the strange low-resolution picture allegedly depicting a man shooting people on Utoya Island taken from above [who took it?], the bogus rationale for insanity, and the latest excuse to avoid people interacting with a real person named Breivik. There’s also all the Jews and Jewish propaganda disseminators who received an emailed manifesto, allegedly from Breivik, shortly before the attacks, which according to the narrative must have been when he briefly stopped somewhere to email his contacts while driving to his destination, loaded with bombs, guns and ammunition. The email recipients haven’t provided the header of the email so that the email address and IP of the sender can be traced. It’s piling up. The job is more kosher than it originally appeared.

Posted by R-news on Thursday, January 26, 2012 at 03:29 PM in Media,  World Affairs
Comments (97) | Tell-a-Friend

The piracy of digital copyrighted content: SOPA, PIPA, etc.

Readers will be aware of legislative endeavors such as SOPA and PIPA (also ACTA and others), superficially intended to tackle the problem of piracy of digital copyrighted content, and the recent seizure of megaupload.com and associated arrests. Whereas the copyright owners could work out deals with file hosts to charge reasonable fees for the distribution of their copyrighted content, they’re not interested. It has been pointed out that a major reason is that they wish to control the dissemination of information—“they” being the very small minority that owns the copyrights to the majority of accessible-for-fee digital content. Digital technologies make it easy to cheaply produce, or simply upload, and use the bandwidth of file hosts, such as the former megaupload, to disseminate gigabytes of information that the authorities may not like. But there are two other perspectives that should also be discussed.

The first is about the nature of copyrighted content and the meaning of piracy. The pirate bay says:

Over a century ago Thomas Edison got the patent for a device which would “do for the eye what the phonograph does for the ear.” He called it the Kinetoscope. He was not only amongst the first to record video, he was also the first person to own the copyright to a motion picture.

Because of Edison’s patents for the motion pictures it was close to financially impossible to create motion pictures in the North American east coast. The movie studios therefore relocated to California, and founded what we today call Hollywood. The reason was mostly because there was no patent. There was also no copyright to speak of, so the studios could copy old stories and make movies out of them—like

Fantasia, one of Disney’s biggest hits ever.

So, the whole basis of this industry, that today is screaming about losing control over immaterial rights, is that they circumvented immaterial rights. They copied (or put in their terminology: “stole”) other people’s creative works, without paying for it. They did it in order to make a huge profit. Today they’re all successful and most of the studios are on the Fortune 500 list of the richest companies in the world. Congratulations—it’s all based on being able to re-use other people’s creative works. And today they hold the rights to what other people create.

If you want to get something released, you have to abide to their rules. The ones they created after circumventing other people’s rules.

The reason they are always complaintng about “pirates” today is simple. We’ve done what they did. We circumvented the rules they created and created our own. We crushed their monopoly by giving people something more efficient. We allow people to have direct communication between each other, circumventing the profitable middle man, that in some cases take over 107% of the profits (yes, you pay to work for them).

It’s all based on the fact that we’re competition. We’ve proven that their existence in their current form is no longer needed. We’re just better than they are.

And the funny part is that our rules are very similar to the founding ideas of the USA. We fight for freedom of speech. We see all people as equal. We believe that the public, not the elite, should rule the nation. We believe that laws should be created to serve the public, not the rich corporations.

The Pirate Bay is truly an international community. The team is spread all over the globe—but we’ve stayed out of the USA. We have Swedish roots and a Swedish friend said this: The word SOPA means “trash” in Swedish. The word PIPA means “a pipe” in Swedish. This is of course not a coincidence. They want to make the internet into a one-way pipe, with them at the top, shoving trash through the pipe down to the rest of us obedient consumers. The public opinion on this matter is clear. Ask anyone on the street and you’ll learn that no one wants to be fed with trash. Why the U.S. government wants the American people to be fed with trash is beyond our imagination but we hope that you will stop them, before we all drown...

...To fix the “problem of piracy” one should go to the source of the problem. The entertainment industry say they’re creating “culture” but what they really do is stuff like selling overpriced plushy dolls and making 11-year-old girls become anorexic... either from working in the factories that creates the dolls for basically no salary or by watching movies and tv shows that make them think that they’re fat.

More here.

Thaddeus Russell provides additional details about how Thomas Edison’s intellectual property and equipment were stolen:

Soon after he invented the motion picture camera and projector, Thomas Edison formed his own movie production and distribution company. In 1908, Edison joined with nine other film companies to form the Motion Picture Patents Company, a monopoly that attempted to control the making, distribution, and showing of all movies in the United States. Edison and “The Trust” pledged to make only movies that promoted wholesome, Christian, and “American” values. But on the Lower East Side, a group of entrepreneurial Jewish immigrants used Edison’s inventions to produce and screen their own films, which were shown in thousands of nickelodeons – five-cent movie theaters – in working-class neighborhoods all over the country. These “outlaw” filmmakers started out as vaudeville and burlesque promoters, and many of their movies were sexier, more violent, and far more entertaining than the bland fare put out by the Edison monopoly.

The great inventor was furious that “Jewish profiteers” were stealing his patent, getting rich from it, and using it to spread “smut” across America. So too were law enforcement officials. In 1907 a judge in Chicago wrote that the nickelodeons “caused, indirectly or directly, more juvenile crime coming into my court than all other causes combined.” Shortly thereafter the Chicago city council passed an ordinance granting power to the chief of police to censor motion pictures played in the city. In New York in 1907, soon after the police commissioner recommended that nickel shows be wiped out entirely, Mayor George McClellan was so moved by the evidence of immoral motion pictures polluting the minds of his citizens that on Christmas Day he ordered that all of the illicit motion picture houses be shut down.

Moral condemnations and court injunctions didn’t stop the proliferation of nickelodeons that showed unseemly fare and violated Edison’s patent, so the inventor and his colleagues hired squads of thugs to shut them down. They seized film, beat up directors and actors, forced audiences out of theaters, smashed the nickelodeon arcades and set fire to entire city blocks where they were concentrated. But fortunately for the Jewish renegades, they lived and operated in neighborhoods where hundreds of soldiers stood ready and able to protect them – men like “Big” Jack Zelig, “Lefty Louie” Rosenberg, “Gyp the Blood” Horowitz, Joe “The Greaser” Rosenzweig, and the leaders of the notorious Yiddish Black Hand, Jacob “Johnny” Levinsky and “Charley the Cripple” Vitoffsky. There were even women ready for the fight – fierce, well-armed “gun-mols” like Bessie London, Tillie Finkelstein, Birdie Pomerantz, and Jennie “The Factory” Morris.

Cameras, projectors, film, and sound equipment disappeared from the storerooms of Edison companies and showed up on makeshift movie lots on the Lower East Side. Bullets rained down on the Trust’s enforcers from the rooftops of nickelodeons. And massive fires destroyed the Edison distributors’ warehouses in the Bronx, Philadelphia, and Chicago. By 1915 the Trust had disbanded and the outlaw filmmakers moved west, where they could make bigger and better movies. Who were the men who, with the help of their nicknamed friends, fought Thomas Edison and the law and won? They were Marcus Loew of Loews Theatres and Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, Carl Laemmle of Universal Pictures, Adolph Zukor of Paramount Pictures, William Fox of Twentieth-Century Fox, and the brothers Harry, Albert, Sam, and Jack Warner.

More.

The second issue’s about disposable income. Most people will support the singers, musicians, authors and content producers they like if they have disposable income, but the same community that has acquired copyright of most written works, music, TV programming and movies produced in recent decades, producing a substantial amount of this work in bad faith—e.g., lies, propaganda—is also behind international banking, thereby impoverishing the majority and making disposable income hard to come up with.

The Hell with these people!

Posted by J Richards on Thursday, January 26, 2012 at 02:23 PM in Global Elitism,  Media,  That Question Again,  World Affairs
Comments (6) | Tell-a-Friend

Ireland Worshipping at the Holocaust Shrine

Ireland Worshipping at the Holocaust Shrine
By Robert Reis

The Irish Independent newspaper published a report on a speech delivered at a new Holocaust exhibition in Dublin on January 23, 2012 by the Justice Minister Alan Shatter. (State ‘did nothing for Jews in WWII’, By Breda Heffernan, The Irish Independent, Tuesday January 24 2012)

Mr. Shatter accused Ireland of turning its back on the suffering of the Jews during World War Two. He proclaimed that the Irish State had lost its “moral compass” during and after the war. He said, “In the period following Hitler coming to power and preceding the Second World War, the doors of this state were kept firmly closed to German Jewish families trying to escape from persecution and death.”

Shatter told his audience that records unearthed by the Minister from the Department of Foreign Affairs while he was researching the period many years ago show that the then Irish Ambassador to Germany, Charles Bewley, recommended the Government refuse visa requests from Jews to protect Ireland from “contamination”.

Shatter was referring to Charles Bewley.

Continued...

Posted by Robert Reis on Thursday, January 26, 2012 at 02:12 PM in History,  Irish Politics,  Jewish Diaspora
Comments (10) | Tell-a-Friend

The Relevance of Ethnocentrism

Previously it was shown that intelligence was of practically no relevance to explaining spectacular Jewish success (control of the mainstream media, ZOG, etc.). An alternative proposed was ethnocentrism. This can be examined, too.

The National Opinion Research Center (NORC), at the University of Chicago, has conducted an annual General Social Survey (GSS) of a random, representative sample of Americans from 1972 onward.

In 1996 and 2004, it asked respondents to answer how close they felt to their racial or ethnic group [variable coded as ETHCLOSE]. The 4 possible responses were: very close, close, not very close, not close at all. Assigning these responses values of 4, 3, 2, 1, respectively, Ron Guhname provided the following averages:

Table 1. ETHCLOSE values
Orthodox Jew (3.86), Conservative Jew (3.71), black (3.53), Norwegian (3.36), All Jews (3.31), Mexican (3.25), Italian (3.20), Irish (3.19), Reform Jew (3.15), American average (3.15), French (3.11), Polish (3.04), English/Welsh (3.02), German (3.01), Scottish (3.00), Other Jew (2.92).

ETHCLOSE captures the core of ethnocentrism and will have to do in the absence of better data on representative samples. Jews, on average, are more ethnocentric than whites. Now let’s look at the proportions among whites, by year:

Table 2. ETHCLOSE answers for whites (percentages)
1996: very close (33.9), close (41.2), not very close (18.9), not close at all (6.0)
2004: very close (39.5), close (36.3), not very close (19.6), not close at all (4.7)
Average: very close (36.5), close (38.9), not very close (19.2), not close at all (5.4)

In the data, Jews are coded as white. Assume that all Jews who say they’re not very close to Jews are lying, in reality very close to their group. This gives a population having a size of about 3.3% of the white population that is very close to its ethnic/racial group, whereas at least 30% of whites are very close to their ethnic/racial grouping. In other words, the number of ethnocentric whites considerably exceeds the number of ethnocentric Jews. We’re dealing with some crudeness, but in spite of making some assumptions that favor those who explain spectacular Jewish success in terms of ethnocentrism, we have to conclude that this couldn’t possibly be an explanation.

Continued...

Posted by J Richards on Tuesday, January 24, 2012 at 01:59 AM in Education,  European Nationalism,  Social Sciences,  That Question Again,  White Nationalism
Comments (39) | Tell-a-Friend

Betrayal, Lawrence, and the English working-class

Earlier today I came across this video at BDF posted by Chuffer, a good, reliable nationalist and ex-BNP member, and a regular participant in the BDF bear-pit.  The theme of injustice and betrayal is not new to us, of course, though it is certainly a pleasure to see it so well structured.  But the street interview section is important, and especially refreshing to see.  There are the authentic voices of the English working-class who have been been subjected to eighteen years of relentless Lawrence propaganda.  And they know it.

Still, one wonders why they exhibit such a resigned attitude, and not more fight.  Then one remembers how deserted these people are.  Not the politicians, not the press, not the Church, not the schools, not the law ... no part of civil society spares them a word of acknowledgement.  It truly is the most complete betrayal imaginable.  And yet, as this video shows, the Lawrence propaganda almost certainly now exercises more influence over the minds of the traitors than it does the betrayed.

Posted by Guessedworker on Monday, January 23, 2012 at 07:36 PM in Activism,  Anti-racism and white genocide,  British Politics
Comments (40) | Tell-a-Friend

The Psychological Witchcraft is wearing off

The Ron Paul Campaign for Liberty is evidence that the psychological witchcraft of Black/Jew political correctness is wearing off.

The people working on the Paul campaign now will go taqqiyah themselves into Congress and then turn out to be Ron Paulites.

It’s a good thing the “racist newsletters” came up so much, to remind the Paulites that “racism” is realism.  I’m noticing that the black commentators are outraged at the conspicuous young whites lack of outrage at Ron Paul and his newsletters.  Young White Paul supporters are “betraying” the black supremacist enforcers of political correctness like Dari’l Jinkins.  Did you see his outraged Ron Paul videos?  He can’t believe that young white people support RP, and don’t care about DJ’s racial sensitivities.

That’s the great development of 2012—the “racism” blackmail is losing it’s magical power, and “magic” is of course just psychology, rather than supernatural power.  Magic and witchcraft are mindweapon tactics—Psychological Operations that have always existed throughout human history.  There is no supernatural; it is just psy-ops.

Those who use psychological witchcraft have to come to terms with the fact that each spell they conjure is mortal, just as people are mortal.  The Civil Rights spell is running its course already; its arteries are blocked, and it’s going to die of a heart attack.

The wizened Jewish spell grew in power by conjuring the Civil Rights spell.  Blacks infused the ancient Jewish witchcraft with new energy.  Blacks were like their children.  But now both spells are losing power together, having wrought great destruction and ruin unto the world, and their trajectory is only “more ruin, more destruction.”

Continued...

Posted by Kievsky on Sunday, January 22, 2012 at 09:08 AM in
Comments (18) | Tell-a-Friend

No to 70 million.

It has been posted here before, this is just a 3 month reminder. Any British citizens should sign the No to 70 million e-petition. As immigration restriction goes its as mild as it gets but better to send a message than none at all.

No to 70 million

Posted by Lurker on Friday, January 20, 2012 at 01:21 PM in
Comments (10) | Tell-a-Friend

Soren Renner at VoR

Tom Sunic interviews Soren here.  Run-time 35min 28sec.

Tom gets Soren to expand, somewhat, on his adoption of the Gramscian dictum “pessimism of the intellect - optimism of the will”, on religion in our present woes, on the concept of the enemy, and on civilisational collapse.  Probably the best interview Soren has given.  Still some dark areas for me, but much to think about.

Posted by Guessedworker on Thursday, January 19, 2012 at 07:42 PM in White Nationalism
Comments (120) | Tell-a-Friend

Supply and demand: The economics of mass immigration

It was claimed that the devastation of the Third World by bankers creates plenty of would-be economic immigrants. The retort was that this is a Judeo-Marxist canard used to induce ‘white guilt’ and justify various ‘aid’ and ‘refugee’ programs. The retort added that parts of Africa in 1812 had yet to see the wheel, the implication being that Third world nations have been built or economically enhanced by the West. The retort also blames slaughters and devastation in the Third World on their natives alone.

Let’s see. Civilization shouldn’t be confused with economic security. An isolated hunter-gatherer tribe living in a jungle typically has sufficient food to eat, clothing and living structures; they are willing and able to provide for themselves. Whereas in a modern civilization such as the U.S., tens of millions are unable to provide food for themselves, in spite of being willing and able to work, and must depend on government handouts such as food stamps, and there are millions of homeless people.

The reason for the economic problems of Western nations is that malicious bankers issue and control money, which is also the case for nearly all Third World nations. So how does the Third world fare under banker control?

For a while now, this is how the international bankers have dealt with the Third World [some things apply to some Western nations also]:

If I recall correctly, Professor Joseph Stiglitz won a Nobel Prize for his work on the following 4-step process.

PRIVATIZATION
Bribe a nation’s leaders to trim billions off the sale price of national assets.

CAPITAL MARKET LIBERALIZATION
Repeal laws that tax money going abroad. International bankers pump in money to gamble on property, currency. When the economy starts to look promising, they pull out their money, devastating the nation.

Now the nation needs emergency IMF loans, which the IMF provides by creating the money for loans out of thin air. Two conditions are attached. The nation has to raise its interest rates considerably. These high interest rates will impoverish the nation. The other condition for the loan is that the electricity, water, telephone and gas systems are effectively sold to international corporations.

MARKET-BASED PRICING
The prices of food, water and domestic gas are raised. This results in social unrest, possibly riots. When massive demonstrations or riots occur, investors start pulling out their money, the government goes bankrupt. Foreign financial corporations can now buy many of the nation’s assets at rock-bottom prices.

FREE TRADE
Now international corporations move into developing nations, whereas Third World agricultural products are barricaded from the West. The bankers impose extortionate tariffs, which these countries have to pay for in branded pharmaceuticals, causing soaring rates of death and disease. And so on.

Naturally, Third World nations will experience significant emigration pressures. Residents of some European nations will better understand what the Third World experiences when austerirty measures in their nations become more severe to pay the interests on loans they need from banks.

As of now, people are rioting over gas prices in Nigeria, but before one brings in the violence proneness of blacks, take a guess at what’s caused the rise and toward which purpose. One has to wonder how many other instances of rioting in Third World nations have their root cause in what the international bankers do, not in violence that would occur no matter what. These international bankers are behind numerous wars in the Western hemisphere, and they surely haven’t left the Third world in peace.

Notice that some black African nations are resource-rich but the masses live in poverty. Is this due to the corruption of their elite? They have corrupt elite, but if this were the reason, there would be lots of black billionaires [U.S. dollars] in some African nations, whereas the natural resource-related wealth is siphoned out by the international bankers, in the manner detailed above, and scraps, in comparison, are given to the corrupt elite.

People complain about me focusing on money and the community disproportionately controlling it when there are serious immigration issues to be discussed, but what’s causing the immigration issues? It takes more than merely opening Western borders to immigrants; Third Worlders need an incentive to emigrate en masse, too.

Will the masses be willing to go to a land far, far away where people speak a different language and have a very different culture if the masses have a reasonable income/sustenance where they live, and live in a relatively peaceful society? Will the masses be willing to give up the security of their existence for discordance, learning and re-learning skills in a foreign nation and the uncertainty of having a similar level of economic security there? These are important questions to reflect on. A desire to emigrate will be true of some individuals, but not the masses if there’s basic economic security [food, shelter, clothing, base medical facilities] and no warfare or civil strife.

But economic devastation provides a strong incentive for mass emigration pressure in the Third World. And thus we have the demand and supply of contemporary mass immigration into Western nations:

Demand

The bankers need to flood the nations where their diaspora live to undermine ethnic solidarity among the host populations and keep the citizens occupied with all the troubles that accompany racial and cultural diversity. This way the bankers reduce the chances of a public or political revolt that vanquishes them.

Supply

Economically devastated Third Worlders naturally want to emigrate en masse.

So is it wise to complain about immigration levels and focus on blacks, Hispanics, Muslims----like Amren, Vdare, the masses of the “alternative right” or “Third position” crowds----or is it wise to aim for the root cause, which lies in malicious bankers controlling the money supply? And is it wise to just focus on the money issue or also expose some of the other major crimes of these people, such as 9/11? They bring in all these immigrants to undermine ethnic cohesion in the West. Complaining about immigration doesn’t help and exacerbates division. But the money issue and 9/11 are of universal significance and unite the divided against the bankers. And some people complain of conspiracy and detraction from the important issues, such as immigration and multiculturalism, when 9/11 is brought up!

Posted by J Richards on Tuesday, January 17, 2012 at 12:35 AM in Demographics,  Economics & Finance,  Globalisation,  Immigration,  That Question Again,  White Nationalism
Comments (80) | Tell-a-Friend